Farmes Services Co-Operative Society Limited ,Mahabubnagar , Mahabubnagar V. Income Tax Officer ,Ward -1,Mahabubnagar , Mahabubnagar

ITA 284/Hyd/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9390 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 28-06-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 263; 80P

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD ‘B’ BENCH, HYDERABAD. BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L. P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Virtual Hearing) ITA No.284/Hyd/2021 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) M/s. Farmes Service Co-operative Society Ltd., Mahabubnagar-509334 PAN AAAAF 3310P .....Appellant. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Mahabubnagar. .....Respondent. ITA No.286/Hyd/2021 (Assessment Year : 2015-16) M/s. Andhra Pragathi Farmers Service Co-op. Society, Ramadurgam Vill., Chippagiri Mandal, Kurnool District. PAN AAAAR 1876J .....Appellant. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Adoni. .....Respondent. Assessees By : Shri M.V. Anil Kumar & Shri Mohd. Afzal for B.A. Sai Prasad. Respondent By : Shri YVST Sai. (D.R.) Date of Hearing : 16.09.2021. Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2021. 2 ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 O R D E R Per Shri S.S. Godara, J.M. : These twin assessees’ appeals ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 for Asst. Years 2016-17 & 2015-16 arise against the PCIT-4, Hyderabad and PCIT, Tirupati’s orders; dt.30.03.2021 and 13.3.2020 in case Nos.ITBA/REV/F/REV5/2020-21/1031959192(1) and ITBA/COM/M/IT/2019-20/1026847590(1); respectively involving proceedings u/s. 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It transpires at the outset that the instant twin appeals suffer from 31 days and 335 days delay; respectively, stated to be attributable to various factors such as communication gap, lack of initiation at the administrative level and compilation of assessee's record. Case law Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors, 1987 AIR 1353 (SC) and University of Delhi Vs. Union of India, Civil Appeal No.9488 & 9489/2019 dated 17 th Dec., 2019, hold that such a delay; supported by cogent reasons, 3 ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 deserves to be condoned so as to make way for the cause of substantial justice. We thus condone the impugned delay in both these cases and proceed to deal the appeals. 3. We now come to the correctness of learned PCITs revision directions under challenge holding the corresponding regular assessment framed on 27.12.2018 and 27.10.2017 as erroneous ones causing prejudice to the interest of the Revenue on the ground that both the said Assessing Officers’ had accepted the assessees’ section 80P(2)(d) deduction claim(s) regarding interest income(s); derived from deposits made in SBI/Nationalised Bank(s) as eligible for the said relief. Learned PCITs rely on hon'ble apex court’s landmark decision in The Totgar Co-operative Sale Society Limited Vs. ITO 322 ITR 283 (SC) that the impugned deduction is exigible only in case of income derived from co-operative banking activity or interest income from a certified institution than deposits made in nationalized banks. Learned PCIT therefore hold both the foregoing assessments as an instance inviting application of 4 ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 section 263 revision jurisdiction. This leaves the assessees’ aggrieved. 4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to rival pleadings qua correctness of the learned PCITs foregoing revision direction and find no reason to uphold the same. This is primarily for the reason that hon’ble jurisdictional high court decision in Vavveru Co-operative Rural Bank Ltd. Vs. CCIT 396 ITR 371 (A.P) holds that a co-operative society’s income derived from deposits in nationalized banks/SBI is also eligible for 80P deduction. Their lordships have duly taken into consideration the hon'ble apex court’s foregoing decision (supra). We therefore hold that both the Assessing Officers therein had not committed any error in not disallowing the assessees’ section 80P(2)(d) deduction claims in issue qua the respective interest income derived form fixed deposit in nationalised banks. The PCITs’ revision direction under challenge herein forming subject matter of these two appeals stand reversed on the very analogy therefore. We lastly quote hon'ble apex court’s 5 ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 landmark decision Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 243 ITR 83 (SC) that an assessment has to be both erroneous as well as causing prejudice to the interest of revenue; simultaneously before the CIT or the PCIT; as the case may be, sets section 263 revision mechanism in motion. And that it is not each and every assessment which would attract revision proceedings but only those wherein the Assessing Officer has not taken one of the two possible views. We thus restore both the assessments herein as a necessary corollary. No other ground has been pressed before us. 5. These twin assessees’ many appeals are allowed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 30th Sept., 2021. Sd/- Sd/- (L.P. SAHU) (S.S. GODARA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Hyderabad, Dt.30.09.2021. * Reddy gp 6 ITA Nos.284 & 286/Hyd/2021 Copy to : 1. i) M/s. Farmes Service Co-operative Society Ltd., 5/130/1, FSCS Buildings, Hunwada Mandal, Mahabubnagar-509334 ii) M/s. Andhra Pragathi Farmers Service Co-op. Society, Ramadurgam Vill., Chippagiri Mandal, Kurnool District. 2. i) ITO, Ward 1,Mahabubnagar. ii) ITO, Ward 1, Adoni. 3. i) Pr. C I T-4, Hyderabad. ii) Pr. CIT, Tirupati Charge, Tirupati. 4. 5. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 6. Guard File. By Order Sr. Pvt. Secretary, ITAT, Hyderabad.